HOW MANY MORE TIMES MUST THIS HAPPEN?

It's happened again. Many of us watched in horror Sunday morning as instead of our usual religious programming or political talk shows we saw images of the aftermath of the latest mass shooting in our beloved country. Survivors and relatives of the victims told heart-rending stories. We eagerly awaited the news conferences giving us information about the gunman, and whether or not this was an attack instigated by ISIL. The young man who carried out the massacre was a Muslim, which fanned the fires of anti-Islamists. His father was interviewed early on, and tried to convince us that this was not due to a connection to ISIL. He stated that his son had recently witnessed two men kissing on a Miami beach, and that enraged him. As the stories progressed throughout the day, it was easy to relate the shootings not only to homophobia, but also to the shooter's desire to be associated with ISIL as a jihadist. He called 911 during the siege to pledge his allegiance to ISIL, and to ensure his "entrance into heaven", as their followers are indoctrinated to believe.

Of all the mass shootings in the U.S., in some statistics defined as "events in which four or more people were killed by a lone gunman", in only three instances were the shooters Muslims. (Fort Hood, TX in 2009, San Bernardino, CA in 2015, and Orlando, FL) Statistics dating back to 1966, indicate that there have been 869 victims, 142 of which were children or teenagers. There is an excellent article with accompanying graphics on the mass shootings in America that will blow your mind: Washington Post

For some to call for a ban on Muslims entering the country -- or to implicate President Obama as being somehow complicit with jihadists, seems like sheer idiocy. Demanding that he resign the presidency only exacerbates this idiocy.

My very first thought as I heard the devastating news was we must do something about the gun laws in this country. Especially banning any military style weapons and high capacity magazines. Reading some comments from our citizens who think more guns are the only answer to mass killings sounds unrealistic. Imagine many guns in a crowded venue when something like this occurs. The Waco biker gang shootout a year ago left nine dead and 18 wounded. Some bikers were armed, but no assault rifles were used. (This was in a relatively open area, as some shooters were outdoors.) In a place like a crowded nightclub, many guns would more than likely put additional people in harms' way as a shootout begins. Someone would have to be an expert marksman - and be positioned just right in order to take out the gunman. God forbid that a security person might have an assault weapon as well.

Banning unnecessary military type weapons and much stronger background checks will go a long way towards prevention of more mass killings. I think Hillary Clinton's suggestion of creating a national database that would include those on "no-fly" lists and anyone under investigation for possible terrorist association would be a good idea. How mental illnesses that border on criminality should be handled without compromising civil rights is something that should be addressed as well.

If implemented, the NRA would be up-in-arms (pun intended). That is, if the scaredy-cat congressmen and women would even dare to present such a bill for passage. Not only on a national level, but even our state legislators are all so afraid of losing the financial backing of the gun manufacturers in this country. Which leads me to another solution -- term limits for all government legislators. Too many are more concerned with appeasing donors so they might be reelected than they are with protecting our citizens from overzealous gun rights advocates.

The lobbyists for major corporations who entice our lawmakers with huge sponsorships and PACs create another opportunity for a solution to many of our problems. There must be a way to overturn Citizens United. (Not the PAC, but the SCOTUS case in 2009). One of the main reasons for the decision was to put any company on equal footing with the media organizations to promote their candidates. While this is a simplified explanation, it makes little sense if one concentrates on who is buying up the media corporations in our country. The extremely wealthy corporations -- like the Sinclair Group -- are gradually taking over much of the broadcast and print media. Most of it is done quietly, and when the FCC gets involved by preventing "monopolies" in certain areas (Texas, for one), the corporations form "satellite" companies to purchase those entities. Thus, they end up controlling much of what is broadcast or published. And eventually promoting and ensuring election of candidates sympathetic to their issues.

Conspiracy theories abound with the stories of Muslims infiltrating the country with jihadists, illegal aliens taking over our jobs, the liberals in government wanting to take all of "our" guns, and even one of the latest that is called "false flag" or "hoax", indicating a mass shooting was somehow perpetrated to distract us from something nefarious going on that might cause us to lose more of our freedom. One presidential candidate loves to hear these theories, and he capitalizes on them every opportunity he gets to increase his popularity with the segment of society who actually believes them. It is certainly scary to see how many people have voted for him and kept him in the running for the most powerful position in the world.

Hillary Clinton is our best chance for implementing the solutions to the many problems brought to the fore by the latest gun massacre. The GOP nominee will only create more mayhem in our country, with his racist, bigoted, and conspiracy-creating rhetoric. With the election of more Democratic legislators, we also may see a return of a safer, more equal society for all.

Peace and love,

Marilyn